(PC) Howell v. Diaz ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAREEM HOWELL, Case No. 1:19-cv-1612-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE; AND 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CASE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY 14 N. DIAZ, et al., WITH COURT ORDER AND FAILURE TO 15 Defendants. PROSECUTE 16 FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 17 Plaintiff’s complaint was recently screened and found to state the following cognizable 18 claims: (1) a First Amendment retaliation claim against defendants Diaz, Garcia, Linon, and 19 Ceballos; (2) a First Amendment mail mishandling claim against Diaz; (3) an Eighth Amendment 20 excessive force claim against Garcia and Ceballos; and (4) an Eighth Amendment medical 21 indifference claim against Ceballos. (Doc. 10.) No other claims were cognizable as pled. 22 In that screening order, plaintiff was directed to submit a notice indicating whether he wished 23 to proceed with the complaint as screened, whether he wished to file a new pleading, or whether 24 he wished to dismiss this action. Plaintiff was specifically forewarned that failure to comply with 25 the Court’s order would result in the recommendation that the action be dismissed for failure to 26 obey a court order and failure to prosecute. The deadline for responding to the Court’s order has 27 now passed, and plaintiff has not submitted his notice or an amended pleading, and he has not 28 1 requested an extension of time to do so. 2 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Clerk of Court to assign a district judge to this case; 3 and 4 The Court RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court order 5 and failure to prosecute. 6 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 8 after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file written 9 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 10 Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 11 specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 12 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: October 1, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28